Journal of International Business Studies最新文献

Drawing on a sociological approach, this paper examines how the subsidiaries of multinational companies (MNCs) translate equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) ideas from their headquarters (HQs). International business (IB) studies emphasize the context-sensitive and socially constructed nature of EDI. Through a single case study of an Italian subsidiary translating EDI ideas from its U.S. HQs, we present a power-laden EDI translation process and broaden the extant research by revealing the power relations underlying the EDI translation process. We portray the sociology of MNCs in which different professional categories engage in “translation spaces”, i.e., social spaces where they interact throughout various phases of the translation process. Specifically, we identify two key phases: the signification and negotiation phases. In these phases, intentional and unintentional translators play varying roles in either facilitating or hindering the translation of EDI ideas within the subsidiary. Thus, we first advance the sociology of EDI translation in IB by revealing how EDI understanding is constructed and reconstructed through the interactions of translators. Second, we contribute to translation research in IB by depicting the iterative and recursive nature of the translation process. Finally, we reveal forms of resistance to EDI and the emergence of new power relations shaped by professional diversity within the subsidiary, unearthing the generative nature of the EDI translation process in MNCs.

A growing body of literature highlights that large-scale investments in sensitive contexts can undermine both firm financial performance and peace-positive development. We investigate whether and under what conditions foreign direct investment (FDI) proximate to Indigenous land claims increases or decreases conflict. Drawing on social movement theory’s identification of powerful frames and political opportunity structures as drivers of mobilization, we predict that FDI proximate to Indigenous land claims will promote conflict. We leverage novel data on the global location of Indigenous land claims and a global corpus of more than 4 billion news articles. We find that when locations with Indigenous land claims are treated with FDI, we observe an increase in media-reported armed conflict events. We further argue and find this effect to be driven by rebels acting on behalf of Indigenous people who target (multinational) corporations and the governments who offer them the formal license to operate. These negative effects are found across a wide range of industries. Our results underscore that for investments in sensitive socio-political contexts, such as Indigenous lands, firm performance and the livelihoods of community members are heavily influenced by conflict risk mitigation efforts.

Despite its continued significance and dynamic forms, government ownership is often presented in broad, monolithic terms. Comparing 67,464 government and private acquirer transactions over four decades, we highlight important distinctions in target selection and valuation effects of 129 unique government investment funds (GIFs), including sovereign wealth funds (SWFs), lesser-known subsidiaries called sovereign wealth enterprises (SWEs), and government-owned pension funds. GIFs, particularly SWFs, are significantly more likely to make foreign investments than non-government investors, which is consistent with their pursuit of internationalization. However, GIFs purchase smaller stakes in targets compared to private acquirers, reflecting concerns about their legitimacy and control over businesses, especially in foreign SWE transactions. Considering how investors evaluate government and private investments, we find that GIF transactions result in significantly lower target returns, with SWE acquisitions being the exception. Evidence suggests these results are driven by liabilities of stateness, such as multi-layered agency concerns and acquirer opaqueness, which vary across GIFs. We also find that macroeconomic conditions that restrict private investment create an internationalization channel for state investors. By recognizing a richer set of motivations and outcomes for various GIFs, public and private stakeholders can optimize state investment transactions, particularly as governments expand their use of different investing vehicles.

Equal treatment of foreign and local firms is the cornerstone of international investment law. Yet, why do foreign firms face discrimination in host countries? We analyze this critical but underexplored aspect of the liability of foreignness in two stages. First, drawing on the insights from political science, we argue that the political ideology of the host government along the left-right spectrum drives discriminatory dynamics, resulting in elevated regulatory risk for foreign firms. Next, we argue that globalization moderates the relative regulatory risk while distinguishing political and social dimensions of globalization: political globalization amplifies the effect of ideology on discrimination, while social globalization mitigates it. We validate our theory using tax inspection data on 38,326 firms across 95 countries from the World Bank Enterprise Surveys between 2008 and 2019. We identify a novel, context-specific source of discrimination revealing how political ideology and globalization jointly shape the regulatory risk of foreign firms. We advance a growing stream of research that explores how political ideologies shape international business. CEOs must recognize that political ideology can drive discrimination risk and that globalization is a double-edged sword. Strategic planning demands nuanced integration of both factors to successfully mitigate discrimination in international markets.

As a disciplinary field, international business (IB) is characterized by language diversity. Too often, however, international business (IB) research regards language diversity as a challenge to be overcome rather than an opportunity to generate new scientific knowledge. Consequently, previous research has primarily focused on the pragmatic, logistical, and methodological hurdles of translating multilingual datasets. In contrast, this conceptual paper takes language diversity as an opportunity to produce new knowledge and proposes a dialogical approach to qualitative cross-language research. The dialogical approach has the potential to enrich IB research with novel perspectives from under-represented voices, improve the understanding of IB phenomena and nurture tolerance for diversity and inclusion through cross-language interaction. It is worth noting that the dialogical approach does not promote shared understanding but mutual understanding that is achieved through collaboration. In doing so, it builds on two types of dialogue: (self-)reflexive dialogue, and dialogue between the researcher and others (interviewees, supervisors, and collaborators participating in the research process). The outcome is knowledge that is pluralistic and multivocal, including the voices that belong to non-English-speaking participants and scholars. We argue that the dialogical approach contributes to the future vision of responsible and linguistically inclusive IB scholarship.

Despite increasing interest, research within the context of Africa, particularly in relation to its unique historical dynamics, remains relatively underexplored in international business (IB). ​Our paper explores how colonial-era historical legacies continue to shape the outcomes of present-day private participation infrastructure (PPI) projects in Africa. By analyzing 301 PPI projects across 102 ethnic groups in 32 African countries, we offer insights into how borders misaligned with pre-colonial ethnic boundaries contribute to conflicts that undermine project viability. The findings reveal that ethnic partitioning, defined as the division of ethnic groups across artificial national borders, negatively impacts PPI project survival, with conflict mediating this relationship. While higher institutional quality mitigates these adverse effects, its impact remains marginal. We incorporate historical perspectives and highlight the importance of considering the path dependence of contemporary institutional environments. It also addresses the growing demand for Africa-focused IB research. By incorporating ethnicity into institutional analyses, our study also challenges the traditional IB assumption regarding the primacy of national borders in business activities. Our study points to the importance of understanding historical backgrounds when doing business in Africa.

Industrial policy, the use of state power to influence the development of industries, has become increasingly influential in international business, yet its firm-level dynamics remain understudied. Through a history-to-theory approach and microhistorical analysis, we investigate how the Finnish shipbuilding industry employed nonmarket strategies (NMS) to influence outward-oriented industrial policies that supported its international expansion. Grounded in New Institutional Economics, we identify two key industrial policy shifts – in the mid-1950s and early 1980s – that reduced cross-border transaction costs for Finnish shipbuilders to enhance their international competitiveness. Before each shift, the industry proactively aligned its business interests with national policy priorities, engaging in what we term “manufacturing national consent” – positioning the sector as critical to national interests to legitimize supportive policies. We critically assess the double-edged role of NMS in industrial policy, demonstrating that while it creates regulatory capture and hinders alternative economic pathways, it also fosters government–business collaboration, improving the prospects of effective policy design. We further account for country-specific factors and broader inter-country dynamics to analyze policy implications for home-country firms. In all, our study contributes to the revitalization of industrial policy as a topic in the IB discipline by uncovering the active role of firms in shaping policy outcomes.

Digitalization and global disruptions have fundamentally changed how we approach work. Global virtual work has become increasingly widespread in recent years, often replacing or complementing traditional expatriation and international business travel. To advance our understanding of this phenomenon, we systematically reviewed the literature on global virtual work, distinguishing it into three domains: global virtual teams, distributed work, and the use of digital technologies. For each domain, we examined key actors, their objectives, underlying theories, methodologies, and findings. The first domain provides insights into the antecedents, moderators, and mediators of the effectiveness of global virtual teams. The second domain explores individual and organizational research on diverse distributed work arrangements, such as offshoring, global platforms, and global nomads. The third domain addresses the enabling and moderating roles that digital technologies play in facilitating global virtual work. Synthesizing prior research, we developed a multilevel conceptual framework that integrates inputs, processes, and outcomes of global virtual work, offering novel perspectives. We outlined promising opportunities for future research across four themes: people, technology, context, and time. Additionally, we examined the practical implications of our findings for policymakers, managers, and individual workers as they navigate the evolving landscape of global virtual work.

How should a multinational enterprise (MNE) shape its own agility in response to the environments in which it operates? In this paper we argue that proactive investments in switching-flexibility, e.g., to facilitate future relocations of production assets, can be a powerful tool for handling international business (IB) volatility. If options to invest in future flexibility are exercised strategically, international relocation may become a more frequent phenomenon in high than in low volatility industries. This prediction contrasts the value-of-waiting recommendation of the classical real options literature, which suggests that relocation becomes less frequent if volatility is high. The differences in predictions stem from a change in perspective—from exogenous flexibility in the classical literature to endogenous flexibility in this study. Optimal proactive investments in future agility increase the value of a firm and enhance the firm’s ability to handle risk. This suggests that MNEs operating in volatile and competitive international markets typically become more agile than firms operating in stable environments. The paper’s proposition is supported by illustrative cases from ocean industries and by a real options model with endogenous reversibility. The model shows that optimal proactive investments in flexibility may tighten the entry and exit threshold spread for higher volatility.